If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the forum FAQ and the House Rules and Forum Guidelines.
You will have to register before you can post. If you find your registration is rejected, please try again using a different username. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Suggestions for future versions
Individual ideas on one subject should still be posted in the wishlist thread, however if you want to discuss your idea with others please create your own thread. Please name your topics sensibly and give an indication of what it is about.
For general ideas or a list please use this Wishlist topic. You can view some older suggestions here

Please see screen prints, matches 1, 2 and 3 are consecutive games and these are only a handful of the games I had problems in. My strikers are Daryl Murphy, Charles Andre Dudin, Craig Davies and John Cunliffe.

Comments are welcome about what you think, I know some of you will agree and some will disagree.

Please see screen prints, matches 1, 2 and 3 are consecutive games and these are only a handful of the games I had problems in. My strikers are Daryl Murphy, Charles Andre Dudin, Craig Davies and John Cunliffe.

Comments are welcome about what you think, I know some of you will agree and some will disagree.

As has been pointed out elsewhere, what we seem to see a lot of in FM08 isn't so much a case of "superkeepers" - where they make seemingly miraculous saves no matter how good the shots - but rather a case of poor shooting, with many shots going right to the keeper. In playing the game so far, I have seen very few games in which the rating for the opposing keeper was 9 or 10 - true superkeeper numbers.

I don't think anyone would deny that the problem needs to be addressed, but then I don't know what is going on tactically in your game, either.

If you don't really tinker with individual players, then they must (By law of elimination) also be set to "Attacking" and "Direct" which means they're bound to snap at shots, rather than taking time to set themselves to shot properly.

If you don't really tinker with individual players, then they must (By law of elimination) also be set to "Attacking" and "Direct" which means they're bound to snap at shots, rather than taking time to set themselves to shot properly.

Thanks for the comments guys, Dave C, your constructive comments inspire us all, and I'm not one to quash any kind of debate... but jog on, you know what I'm trying to get at, there's no need for useless put downs!

Why would those tactics automatically make a striker take snap shots, If the ball drops to someone in the area and he hits it towards goal with any sort of aggression, law of averages suggest that he will score if the shot is on target? but in this case he doesn't and nor do the other 3 strikers in my team, all way too good for league 1 might I add, don't you think that at least one of my 4 strikers would score at least 2 goals in 40odd shots?

If you don't really tinker with individual players, then they must (By law of elimination) also be set to "Attacking" and "Direct" which means they're bound to snap at shots, rather than taking time to set themselves to shot properly.

Don't be blaming his tactics for the problem.If he can get that much shots on target with so few goals there is a MAJOR problem

I never presumed that my answer was the be-all and end-all, I was merely making a suggestion as to a POSSIBLE solution to the problem. I'm merely relaying what I've picked up on here.
Anyways, for those who know me, I'm probably the worst manager in the world so I'm not really one to offer conclusive answers to problems.

I know some peeps will say that there isn't a problem looking at the amount of goals I scored, the issue is that I beat a lot of teams scoring 3 or 4 goals then lost to 0 or 1 in games where I should have scored more, I think the whole thing is just on it's head?

Nik, a recent conversation in A Manual to Team Talk... has me wondering if its a team-talk issue as much as a tactics issue.

I think your strikers' confidence is a huge part of it; unconfident strikers seem to "rush" shots, which results in them being straight to the 'keeper and consequently easy to save, and consequently you get a low shots/goals ratio.

Luiz, in that thread, felt that the team-talks feedback he got helped solve the shots/goals ratio problem he'd been experiencing as well.

I'm not saying that is or is not the answer - but it might be something to think about, as an "item which is in my control", instead of feeling victimized by the match engine.

Originally posted by niktheblade1:
Dave C, your constructive comments inspire us all, and I'm not one to quash any kind of debate... but jog on, you know what I'm trying to get at, there's no need for useless put downs!

Nobody has ever told me to "jog on" before, which has always disappointed me.
Thanks for addressing that imbalance.

No problem!! and that response has just made me rethink my opinion of you.....

You are clearly an intelligent bod and I respect that

Anyway, I swapped the praises round for my next game and drew 2-2 again with Bradford in the Johnstones Paint Trophy, again at home, an even game, doudin and nowland scored.

Next game was against Northampton, who are fellow prmotion chasers, played 4, won 2, drawn 1, lost 1, it was at home and I won 2-0 with 12 shots, 5 on target. I told Doudin and Cunliffe that I expected a performance, the scorers were Nowland (pen) and Henri Camara when he came on as sub, the team were told "I expect a win", at the beginning and 1-0 up at half time were told "pleased", then I brought Camara on.

From looking at your results you have picked these games from a period of over 9 months.

Also from looking at them, I can see that the game against Bury was a realistic result. You may have had 19 shots but you only had 7 on target so it's entirely possible you could fail to score. Again, the QPR game you only had one more shot than QPR did. They won 1-0. Perhaps there could have been a couple more goals but I don't see too much wrong. The game against Bristol, only 6 on target again. So I can only really see what four results which may be a little unrealistic. However, with those four results being so spread out, its possible that could happen in real life. I don't see too much wrong here. Maybe there could have been some more goals but this is a game which can't hope to mimick real life as well as some people think it should. If these results were in the space of 2 months or so, then I'd agree there is a problem but the screens you have posted are nowhere near you claim of 'proof'.

Im on my 4th season with Benfica iv won 3 leagues 2 champions and 7 nationals cups and iv got the same prob as our friend here i complitly dominate the league games (ex. with Porto and Sporting away) i usualy have 20 SoG and 10 SoT per game and i score 1 or to 2 per game (most of them from rebounds or free kick and corners) the prob as far has i can see is not the GK but the ST tends to shoot straight at the keeps on 1on1s, i usualy have 3 or 4 1on1 per game with the ST alone with no pressure on him and he usualy score only 1 every 2 matches that 0.5/3.5 goals/1on1.

Another thing iv noticed is that if i suffer a goal i tend to score more.

By the way my usual ST is Vagner Love he has Fin-18 Com-16 and dispite the fact that he as an high dribling and tecnique he almost never trys to drible the GK, my 2nd ST is Oscar Cardozo Fin-18 Com-17

it seems to me that SI could do a decent defending routine for the game engine and the are 2 many 1on1 so they nerfed the shooting acuracy.

Well if players scored on all those 1 on 1's, the game balance would be horrible. Every game would end up 15-1 or 10-4 or high scoring games. It would be ridiculous. So yes, common sense would lower the accuracy to avoid unrealistic high scoring results every match.

I have a similar problem with Spurs I'm in my fifth season and won the EPL 3 years running and the CL 2 years running and Uefa twice before that so I've had alot of success but the amount of shots on goal a good tactic gets is very high and the finishing ability of world class strikers is often p!ss poor.

All in all I think it's a hard problem to fix because you're always going to beable to exploit the match engine with a good tactic so If your strikers score 50% of there good chances alot of games will be out of control with very high scores.

It's still annoying though when your team of world beaters have 15 shots on target but still draw Derby County 1-1 when they only had 2 shots and 1 on target that went in.

Originally posted by Skunner:
Well if players scored on all those 1 on 1's, the game balance would be horrible. Every game would end up 15-1 or 10-4 or high scoring games. It would be ridiculous. So yes, common sense would lower the accuracy to avoid unrealistic high scoring results every match.

...bot to mention bumping up keeper ability, as well...

His tactics create a lot of shots, but still, the real problem lies with the ME allowing those shots to happen. Passing is too accurate and the touch for receiving a pass too "magnetic", IMO, especially for lower leagues. The DCs take poor angles when closing and don't drop back far enough when an attack develops. And the FBs will leave their man to close the ball when it's passed back from winger to FB, leaving the winger open, and the DCs are very slow to shift coverage over.

All these things result in far too many shooting opportunities, and the necessary ability adjustments to keep game scores realistic.

I can't tell what the morale was, at the moment everyoje is either good or superb.

I think the problem is just the high level of shots on goal... but I wonder if SI were to fix this and teams only had a few shots every game, would this lead to other problems? like player ratings and values?

Also, would anyone complain if the highlights more often than not end up withought a shot on goal at the end of it, moreover say a cross that goes over everyone after a decent build up, or a missed placed pass is too long for your striker and the keeper picks it up? Would people say "The match engine is boring and there aren't enough shots", then we would be in the same position as we are now.

I'm not sure this is an easy problem to fix, hopefully SI can implement it in '09 because a patch for this version may do more harm than good?

I have just beaten Northampton 2-0, they beat me 4-1 at the end of the last season, which is about 10 games ago.

I had 12 shots and 5 on target, so the 2 goals is more realistic, I think we might be onto something with the Morale thing, I told both strikers that I wanted a performance from them.

Neji,
Thanks for your comments and I see your point, but these are indeed a handful of games over the season, but there are other games like this and I'm not too sure that 7 on target with 0 goals is an accurate (not exact) replica of real life, I could probably accept 3 or 4 withought a goal and on the odd occasion 6 or 7, but it seems that every game results in 7 or more shots with maybe 1 or 2 goals scored, I hope you see what I'm getting at, I'm just of the opinion that the ratio needs cutting down to make it more comparable to realism.

Also, apologies if the thread title is mis-leading on the "proof" comment, I wanted to get peoples attention.

Anyway, I'll stop writing now so everyone doesn't get bored of my babbling.

Anyone who thinks SI have implemented either:
a) a "superkeeper" routine or
b) a "misfiring striker" routine
purely to stop unrealistic scorelines is making a stupid, but all too understandable, mistake.

Originally posted by niktheblade1:
I can't tell what the morale was, at the moment everyoje is either good or superb.

I think the problem is just the high level of shots on goal... but I wonder if SI were to fix this and teams only had a few shots every game, would this lead to other problems? like player ratings and values?

Also, would anyone complain if the highlights more often than not end up withought a shot on goal at the end of it, moreover say a cross that goes over everyone after a decent build up, or a missed placed pass is too long for your striker and the keeper picks it up? Would people say "The match engine is boring and there aren't enough shots", then we would be in the same position as we are now.

I'm not sure this is an easy problem to fix, hopefully SI can implement it in '09 because a patch for this version may do more harm than good?

I have just beaten Northampton 2-0, they beat me 4-1 at the end of the last season, which is about 10 games ago.

I had 12 shots and 5 on target, so the 2 goals is more realistic, I think we might be onto something with the Morale thing, I told both strikers that I wanted a performance from them.

Neji,
Thanks for your comments and I see your point, but these are indeed a handful of games over the season, but there are other games like this and I'm not too sure that 7 on target with 0 goals is an accurate (not exact) replica of real life, I could probably accept 3 or 4 withought a goal and on the odd occasion 6 or 7, but it seems that every game results in 7 or more shots with maybe 1 or 2 goals scored, I hope you see what I'm getting at, I'm just of the opinion that the ratio needs cutting down to make it more comparable to realism.

Also, apologies if the thread title is mis-leading on the "proof" comment, I wanted to get peoples attention.

Anyway, I'll stop writing now so everyone doesn't get bored of my babbling.

more important thing then just fixing SOT/G Ratio is to find out why it happens (poor defending in the 1st place: positioning and the lack of congestion even more). I don't think 7 shots on goal is a proof, without taking into acount the quality of the chance.

I am the away side with the Super Keeper who saved 5 opposition shots and then we went and scored with our only shot on taget in the whole game.

This area isn't quite right in the game but it can be managed well enough with some tactical accumen.

I REALLY believe in tha adage that if the AI can do it then I can do it too.

Since CM03/04 I have had Super Keepers in any team I manage, (except against "greys"), and I regularly recreate the situations that are described in this thread and others. The only difference is that it is the AI with the profligate strikers and me with the Super Keeper.

Originally posted by Dave C:
Anyone who thinks SI have implemented either:
a) a "superkeeper" routine or
b) a "misfiring striker" routine
purely to stop unrealistic scorelines is making a stupid, but all too understandable, mistake.

A guy from SI, very possibly Paul C (although my memory is sketchy) did in fact come on here not too long ago and STATE that finishing had been toned down due to the number of chances created by the ME.

If i dig out the link to that thread i'll be sure to post it here, as i'm sure some will no doubt find it unlikely.

I am the away side with the Super Keeper who saved 5 opposition shots and then we went and scored with our only shot on taget in the whole game.

This area isn't quite right in the game but it can be managed well enough with some tactical accumen.

I REALLY believe in tha adage that if the AI can do it then I can do it too.

Since CM03/04 I have had Super Keepers in any team I manage, (except against "greys"), and I regularly recreate the situations that are described in this thread and others. The only difference is that it is the AI with the profligate strikers and me with the Super Keeper.

I've noticed that when i've been tactically outclassed, or just against a better team, then quite often my keepers perform miracles and the opp strikers have howlers - i think i've said elsewhere, it's not the AI cheating, just the ME screwing up what should be a fairly predictable result 9/10 times IRL.

Ched, you and Dave C agree I think. You are just looking at it from different sides.

We all agree that there are issues with the amount of chances being created and this causes issues with the number of goals that are scored.

You are correct about the quote that you mentioned, but so is Dave C in that SI haven't created either a "Super Keeper" routine or a "misfiring striker" routine. They have quite simply "toned down the finishing in certain areas of the pitch" (if memory serves me right.

What they should have done is fixed the movement of defenders when the ball is being bassed to an opposing attacker.

Defenders defend pretty well when they are faced with an attacker in posession of the ball. The problem is that they are really lacking common sense when faced with an attacker making a run without the ball, or chasing a long ball that the attacker will reach first. The AI I just isn't very I when it comes to defending off the ball.

Originally posted by Jimbokav1971:
Ched, you and Dave C agree I think. You are just looking at it from different sides.

We all agree that there are issues with the amount of chances being created and this causes issues with the number of goals that are scored.

You are correct about the quote that you mentioned, but so is Dave C in that SI haven't created either a "Super Keeper" routine or a "misfiring striker" routine. They have quite simply "toned down the finishing in certain areas of the pitch" (if memory serves me right.

What they should have done is fixed the movement of defenders when the ball is being bassed to an opposing attacker.

Defenders defend pretty well when they are faced with an attacker in posession of the ball. The problem is that they are really lacking common sense when faced with an attacker making a run without the ball, or chasing a long ball that the attacker will reach first. The AI I just isn't very I when it comes to defending off the ball.

Yeah, that's pretty much what iw as trying to say.

The amount of times i see my defenders standing back and admiring a forward run.....

Anyway, let's hope it's sorted for 8.0.2 (or at least better) because i just don't have the temprement to play at the moment.

Originally posted by Dave C:
Anyone who thinks SI have implemented either:
a) a "superkeeper" routine or
b) a "misfiring striker" routine
purely to stop unrealistic scorelines is making a stupid, but all too understandable, mistake.

A guy from SI, very possibly Paul C (although my memory is sketchy) did in fact come on here not too long ago and STATE that finishing had been toned down due to the number of chances created by the ME.

If i dig out the link to that thread i'll be sure to post it here, as i'm sure some will no doubt find it unlikely.

Finishing was toned down because the stats that were coming out actually showed the conversion rate of chances was TOO HIGH.
RL it's about 20% and there were builds were it was significantly over that.

It was not toned down in order to prevent high scores (not in the sense the poster meant).

Originally posted by Jimbokav1971:
The AI I just isn't very I when it comes to defending off the ball.

I assume we've all played football at some level or other.

Remember how much thinking went into a 90 minute match? It's like an hour and a half of constant anticipation and recalculation. To simulate that amount of thought for 22 players on the pitch plus referees and the opposition manager would require massive amounts of processer attention.

I think we're a long way from being able to run that kind of AI on today's typical PC. Until then we're going to have to make do with the sawn-off version we have now.

Originally posted by Dave C:
Anyone who thinks SI have implemented either:
a) a "superkeeper" routine or
b) a "misfiring striker" routine
purely to stop unrealistic scorelines is making a stupid, but all too understandable, mistake.

Okay, let's see ...

quote:

Originally posted by Neil Dejyothin:
...
Match v640
...Power shots more likely to go too high.
...Keepers more effective on long shots.
Match v643
...Made players a little more willing to shoot first time.
Match v645
...Further tweak to make more early shots when under pressure or in good position.
...Made some headers on goal slightly less powerful.
Match v646
...Reduced shot accuracy slightly.
Match v647
...Fixed bug where keepers occasionally miss saves for no reason.
...Tweaked number of shots going over bar.
Match 650
...More tweaks to improve goalie positioning and reactions

Several adjustments, all designed to make the keepers better and the shooters less accurate. If these weren't done because too many goals were being scored, then why?

Right, I'm not joking now, this is really starting to get my goat... It's stupid and ruining my game, If this isn't an issue then I am Bruce Forsythe! Slag me off all you want, but this realoly needs sorting!

Originally posted by Dave C:
As I've already said to Ched, all done not to punish dominance, but to correct areas where statistically the coversion rate was TOO HIGH.

Then too much attention is being paid to the little picture without regard to the big ... one can't make the assumption that if all the small parts are near-perfect, that their assemblage will be as well.

There's just so much interconnectivity. Bump one small issue, and there's a ripple effect like a row of dominoes waiting to fall. I've been there before ... you can only change one thing, thing "A", at a time. Then, study what happens to "B", "C", "D", and "E", and the whole before making a second adjustment, either further changing "A" and repeating until everything else looks decent, or moving on to "B" or "F".

That "one thing at a time" is crucial to maintaining balance, and is most difficult to stick to for an impatient summbuck like myself ...

I have never thought its super keepers, its always down to the strikers, but what are you supposed to do? i mean you buy good strikers with high finishing, compusure, technique, off the ball, first touch etc then your good midfielders and tactic create 20-30 shots a game but you can barely score one goal, including plenty of one v ones and close range headers and shots. What are you supposed to do when an oppoenent with far worse strikers, who have lower finishing, composure, technique, even in most cases morale, score with the only chance they have? someone please tell me what the answer to that is? i mean you cant build a defence that never lets a goal in they are gonna let the opponent have a few chances, especially if you have an attacking team. If it happens once or twice a season then fine, however is doesnt it happens far too often. When i watch match of the day and in the post match interviews the stats scroll across the bottom of the screen, when like Man U have won 3-0 they usually have only had about 10 shots in the game, probably 6 or so on target. So clearly the game engine is letting you create too many chances, but also at the same time not score enough of those chances, for example i have made myself in the game, i have finshing 19, composure 19, technique 20, long shots 19, off the ball 19 and heading and jumping 15, looking at the stats i have 10 goals from 127 attempts! of which 76 were on target make sense of that if you will, although some dude will just come back with 'tactics' which is the answer to everything according to some people on here.

Have SI confirmed if they are looking at this issue or not, it seems like all that ever happens is the people provide screenshot aftrer screenshot like SI suggest, but nothing seems to get done? I have just lost 1-0 at home to Lincoln after having 14 shots on target, their goalkeeper stopped 4 shots in iummediate succession and people say there isn't a problem? I just don't understand why so many people complain yet nothing concrete ever gets said.

I apologise if this isn't the case, I just wondered if anyone had said anything?

Whatever the reason for there being a problem, there is definitely a problem with this shots on goal/finishing thing. The fact that so many are complaining about it proves this. There are times in my games when my strikers finish perfectly, but most of the time it's straight at the goalkeeper. It needs a bit of tweaking, and as much as some seem to deny that there is a problem, there clearly is as customers are not happy with the situation.